Michael Jackson's ribs were broken as medics frantically tried to resuscitate him from a cardiac arrest, according to the star's autopsy report. The Sun has revealed shocking details from the King Of Pop's autopsy, conducted after his untimely death on Thursday.
Four puncture sites were found on the 50 year old's chest - appearing to be a result of attempts to restart his heart with shots of adrenaline, according to the publication.
And the star's hips, thighs and shoulders were also riddled with needle wounds.
The leaked autopsy reveals Jackson weighed just eight stone (50 kilograms) when he died. Pathologists found his stomach empty apart from partially-dissolved pills and samples have now been sent for toxicology tests.
Jackson was also discovered to be balding underneath his famed black hair - the document states the star had little more than a "peach fuzz" on his scalp.
Coroner officials found the star had bruising on his knees and shins as well as a cut on his back.
The three hour autopsy on Friday revealed no indication of trauma or foul play, but a final verdict will take up to six weeks as Los Angeles coroner officials are taking extra time to complete toxicology, neuropathology and pulmonary tests before determining the exact cause.
How did anyone expect this man to do 50 concerts!
Quote from: jimbo on June 29, 2009, 08:42:06 AM
Michael Jackson's ribs were broken as medics frantically tried to resuscitate him from a cardiac arrest, according to the star's autopsy report. The Sun has revealed shocking details from the King Of Pop's autopsy, conducted after his untimely death on Thursday.
Four puncture sites were found on the 50 year old's chest - appearing to be a result of attempts to restart his heart with shots of adrenaline, according to the publication.
And the star's hips, thighs and shoulders were also riddled with needle wounds.
The leaked autopsy reveals Jackson weighed just eight stone (50 kilograms) when he died. Pathologists found his stomach empty apart from partially-dissolved pills and samples have now been sent for toxicology tests.
Jackson was also discovered to be balding underneath his famed black hair - the document states the star had little more than a "peach fuzz" on his scalp.
Coroner officials found the star had bruising on his knees and shins as well as a cut on his back.
The three hour autopsy on Friday revealed no indication of trauma or foul play, but a final verdict will take up to six weeks as Los Angeles coroner officials are taking extra time to complete toxicology, neuropathology and pulmonary tests before determining the exact cause.
That says it all to me!
Jimbo don't you laugh at the use of wikipedia?
Yet you quote the Sun?
I know it's Monday morning but I'm finding this hard to understand!
The Sun isn't a reliable paper and I can't imagine anything been known so soon.
It was reported by his nanny that jacko only thought he was doing 10 concerts until someone told him after he had signed up that it was 50.
Quote from: Hereiam on June 29, 2009, 05:15:15 PM
It was reported by his nanny that jacko only thought he was doing 10 concerts until someone told him after he had signed up that it was 50.
According to the nanny the first thing Jacksons Ma asked was where had he hidden money at the house .
Quote from: Puckoon on June 29, 2009, 04:59:56 PM
Jimbo don't you laugh at the use of wikipedia?
Yet you quote the Sun?
I know it's Monday morning but I'm finding this hard to understand!
I cut and pasted that article from Yahoo's front page - the article references the Sun. And yes I laugh at assholes on here who use wikipedia to back up facts, suppose you think it's the Bible as well. :D
No sir, I do not. Intact I'm not sure what I believe about the bible now that ziggy has Jesus down as the author of the Adam and eve "parable"
what I will say about wikipedia is that there are people smarter than us two arseholes who contribute to it very successfully and monitor and edit their pages of expertise. So in short, for some categories of interest ( not Jacksons autopsy) wikipedia is a fine resource.
By the way, you still quoted the sun...
Many on here use it as their only source of reference when "presenting facts" – this shows complete naivety and hence is laughable.
Quote from: Puckoon on June 29, 2009, 06:17:58 PM
By the way, you still quoted the sun...
I pasted an article which referenced the Sun - if anything I quoted Yahoo.
Mike Adams, one of the best and most respected in his field, has an interesting article on Michael Jackson. I would go further and say that he was used as a tool for deception as are several celebrities in order to distract and hide far more important issues from world view.
http://www.naturalnews.com/026517_Michael_Jackson_drugs_pharmas.html (http://www.naturalnews.com/026517_Michael_Jackson_drugs_pharmas.html)
Seamus you are indeed correct. In fact I can't even count how many times over the last few weeks I thought about Michael jackson and the similarities his life has had with the world renowned Mike Adams. Eerie stuff...
Quote from: jimbo on June 29, 2009, 08:42:06 AM
Michael Jackson's ribs were broken as medics frantically tried to resuscitate him from a cardiac arrest, according to the star's autopsy report. The Sun has revealed shocking details from the King Of Pop's autopsy, conducted after his untimely death on Thursday.
Four puncture sites were found on the 50 year old's chest - appearing to be a result of attempts to restart his heart with shots of adrenaline, according to the publication.
And the star's hips, thighs and shoulders were also riddled with needle wounds.
The leaked autopsy reveals Jackson weighed just eight stone (50 kilograms) when he died. Pathologists found his stomach empty apart from partially-dissolved pills and samples have now been sent for toxicology tests.
Jackson was also discovered to be balding underneath his famed black hair - the document states the star had little more than a "peach fuzz" on his scalp.
Coroner officials found the star had bruising on his knees and shins as well as a cut on his back.
The three hour autopsy on Friday revealed no indication of trauma or foul play, but a final verdict will take up to six weeks as Los Angeles coroner officials are taking extra time to complete toxicology, neuropathology and pulmonary tests before determining the exact cause.
Jesus Christ ::)
Quote from: heganboy on June 29, 2009, 06:41:11 PM
Seamus you are indeed correct. In fact I can't even count how many times over the last few weeks I thought about Michael jackson and the similarities his life has had with the world renowned Mike Adams. Eerie stuff...
What a well thought out and intelligent observation. Your signature also does you proud.
Quote from: heganboy on June 29, 2009, 06:41:11 PM
Seamus you are indeed correct. In fact I can't even count how many times over the last few weeks I thought about Michael jackson and the similarities his life has had with the world renowned Mike Adams. Eerie stuff...
:)
The bould Mike Adams goes on to muse
"Although I have no specific proof of this, it is my belief that........"Then later on he quotes the Sun as source for the facts to support his belief ;D
Quote from: Puckoon on June 29, 2009, 06:17:58 PM
No sir, I do not. Intact I'm not sure what I believe about the bible now that ziggy has Jesus down as the author of the Adam and eve "parable"
Oh go and do one you fcuker! >:(
:D
Dowloaded Martin Bashir's documentary "Living with Michael Jackson" from 2003. It was interesting viewing at the time. Am I right in saying that this programme prompted the court case from one of the families?
Quote from: Archie Mitchell on June 29, 2009, 07:18:13 PM
Dowloaded Martin Bashir's documentary "Living with Michael Jackson" from 2003. It was interesting viewing at the time. Am I right in saying that this programme prompted the court case from one of the families?
Yeah, plus Bashir was in the hotel bedroom with Michael when he led his baby over the window ledge.
Quote from: Main Street on June 29, 2009, 07:10:12 PM
Quote from: heganboy on June 29, 2009, 06:41:11 PM
Seamus you are indeed correct. In fact I can't even count how many times over the last few weeks I thought about Michael jackson and the similarities his life has had with the world renowned Mike Adams. Eerie stuff...
:)
The bould Mike Adams goes on to muse
"Although I have no specific proof of this, it is my belief that........"
Then later on he quotes the Sun as source for the facts to support his belief ;D
Main Street do you believe that Michael Jackson was on pharmaceutical drugs?
It is a fact that he was being prescribed drugs
The toxicology report when/if it does appear should reveal the quantity and variety of prescribed drugs found in his system.
If Mike Adams is an acclaimed authority (which I seriously doubt based on this article) then he should know better that to waffle on about his conspiracy theory on how MJ was chemically manipulated for profit and use the Sun as a source.
He also states
"In the end, there's no doubt that Jackson was pumped full of too many drugs for any man to bear."
MJ might well be pumped up to the gills with drugs but we don't know that yet, the toxicology report has not surfaced yet.
An authoritative person keeps an open mind until a toxicology report leaves one in no doubt.,
unless of course, the report has been doctored :)
Quote from: Seamus on June 29, 2009, 07:08:31 PM
What a well thought out and intelligent observation. Your signature also does you proud.
Seamus
why thank you. Coming from you I'll actually take that as a compliment- no offense...
Well he had a medical doctor at his fulltime disposal which should give us some insight.
I not saying what Mike Adams thought process is correct and neither does he, it is only a possibility. Note he asked a question "Was Michael Jackson Chemically Manipulated for Profit?
I do believe as does Mike that we are being fed lies by main stream media regarding much of the life of Michael Jackson most of which originated from supermarket tabloids. His "friends" are also questionable or should be. Elvis Presley and Mike Tyson's 'friends' also come to mind in this regard. Mike Adams is a person that goes outside the box and can think for himself, maybe I should have known better than post his article on this forum.
It's a pity Jacksons family were not as concerned about him when he was alive, the Oul fella just sees $$$$$$ now
Quote from: Minder on June 29, 2009, 10:50:09 PM
It's a pity Jacksons family were not as concerned about him when he was alive, the Oul fella just sees $$$$$$ now
He always did. Part of the reason Michael grew up to be so fcuked up as he was.
I was reading a piece today and Jackson said himself he was being pressured into reforming the Jackson 5 because they were all broke
Old MJ interview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJW_yTbYGoI&feature=fvsr (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJW_yTbYGoI&feature=fvsr)
Quote
Well he had a medical doctor at his fulltime disposal which should give us some insight.
the doctor was hired by the promoter to ensure Jackson was healthy for the concert series
QuoteI not saying what Mike Adams thought process is correct and neither does he, it is only a possibility. Note he asked a question "Was Michael Jackson Chemically Manipulated for Profit?
no idea where you're going with that- but he was manipulated yes- chemically yes so maybe that is an agreement?
Quote
I do believe as does Mike that we are being fed lies by main stream media regarding much of the life of Michael Jackson most of which originated from supermarket tabloids. His "friends" are also questionable or should be. Elvis Presley and Mike Tyson's 'friends' also come to mind in this regard.
Seamus, I think 99% of the folks on this board are agreed that most of the jackson stories they hear are crap- as are the constant Brangleina stories, aniston and madonna stories that are printed. I also believe that most people acknowledge he was significantly misled by his "advisors" as were Presley and Tyson. Still have no idea why you're so upset
QuoteMike Adams is a person that goes outside the box and can think for himself, maybe I should have known better than post his article on this forum.
non sequitur, but yep- he's way outside the box, way , way outside the box. I appreciate that he has a significantly different opinion than most people especially as regarding his "celebrity" vis a vis Michael Jackson. This is however a discussion forum so if you post something that you wish to stimulate discussion and provoke thought, (which I have to say is something that your posts are designed to do given your tendency towards conspiracy theories) so don't be too disappointed if they do exactly that. Some of the posters will call bullshit- don't go huffing off in a corner because folks disagree with you.
Quote
the doctor was hired by the promoter to ensure Jackson was healthy for the concert series
And what a good job he made of it. It doesn't matter when the doctor became fulltime. A cocktail of pharmaceutical drugs administered daily is detrimental to ones health and of course can lead to manipulation. Unfortunately for them the 50 concert pay day wasn't to be.
Quote
no idea where you're going with that- but he was manipulated yes- chemically yes so maybe that is an agreement?
Mike Adams was thinking out loud, far better than following blindly. My point is that more people should do likewise and not be afraid of the probable ridicule that may accompany it.
Quote
Seamus, I think 99% of the folks on this board are agreed that most of the jackson stories they hear are crap- as are the constant Brangleina stories, aniston and madonna stories that are printed. I also believe that most people acknowledge he was significantly misled by his "advisors" as were Presley and Tyson.
Completely with you that 99% of board members agree that most of MJ stories are crap, they would be very naive otherwise but far more than 1% are convinced that Michael Jackson is a pedophile going by the other MJ thread. There is no concrete proof of this other than the fact that people were trying and succeeding to extract money from him. If my child was molested, believe you me a money payoff would not come into the equation.
QuoteStill have no idea why you're so upset
I'm not the slightest bit upset. I know full well that the vast majority of people disagree with my opinions on world affairs. I completely understand as I too was conditioned. It's the opposite as it empowers me, something that you are incapable of understanding going by your responses thus far.
Quote
non sequitur, but yep- he's way outside the box, way , way outside the box. I appreciate that he has a significantly different opinion than most people especially as regarding his "celebrity" vis a vis Michael Jackson. This is however a discussion forum so if you post something that you wish to stimulate discussion and provoke thought, (which I have to say is something that your posts are designed to do given your tendency towards conspiracy theories) so don't be too disappointed if they do exactly that.
This is probably the first time you have heard of Mike Adams yet you have already judged him.
Funny how you call me a conspiracy theorist when you believe in one of the biggest conspiracy theories of them all, the official 911 fairytale. Hopefully you are not one of the people that still believes in the Oswald "lone nut theory". Then there's global warming, now called climate change. What do you thing of the Cap and Trade Bill passed in the House and now heading for the Senate soon to be signed into law by the messiah Abomination? The crap is hitting us between the eyes yet some still cannot see.
QuoteSome of the posters will call bullshit- don't go huffing off in a corner because folks disagree with you.
Some posters can call it bullshit for all I care, it say more about them than it does me.
What I´d like to know Seamus, is where you stand on Chappaquiddick?
Pharmaceutical drugs :o
Medical doctors :o
Quote from: Main Street on July 01, 2009, 01:24:39 AM
What I´d like to know Seamus, is where you stand on Chappaquiddick?
Two Nurofen Plus and some vaseline will get you to the clinic.
Quote from: Main Street on July 01, 2009, 01:24:39 AM
What I´d like to know Seamus, is where you stand on Chappaquiddick?
A big blooper at the very least in Ted's life. I do not know enough about it to form a proper stance. I would be interested in your views on it Main Street
Quote from: Seamus on June 30, 2009, 11:58:18 PM
Mike Adams was thinking out loud, far better than following blindly. My point is that more people should do likewise and not be afraid of the probable ridicule that may accompany it.
Adams "thinking out loud "was part stimulated after reading a report in the Sun. He peddled a conspiracy, when the known and established facts in this case alone make bizarre reading. Adams did not add anything of substance to the event except to push his own agenda just as you are pushing your conspiracy agendas,
---------------------------
I see Obama had some moments of silence in the House of Representatives for Michael Jackson.
I find this unbelievable.
Though only one criminal case made it to the courts where it was never proven. Other cases never went that far due to lack of evidence after the principal accuser were settled out of court.
Nevertheless, Jackson's personal conduct did not meet even the common standard of decency. Much of his personal life centered around (prescribed) drugs and an obsession with children and childhood. By his own admission, Jackson repeatedly "slept" with unrelated children at his mansion in "Neverland". Perhaps as a form of compensation, those children and their families enjoyed luxurious benefits.
Are courts with juries the only way in which someone may be recognized as a pedophile? Is there no common definition that might apply based
on undisputed facts? if this was a priest would such leeway be given by the public? Nowadays pedophilia is high profile. Everyone is sensitive about it.
Clinton had sexual relations with an assistant half his age and lied about it to everyone, yet the public in general gave him leeway and did not care as long as they credited him with a glamorous and somewhat successful administration. In Jackson's case, being an abused is not a defense, however his response to being abused was to stay like a kid with a fragile persona /delicate voice which oozed - please do not hurt me. Maybe it was that which influenced the public, also people do want their pop star idol besmirched.
All is not lost as there is talk of other Jackson family members taking Jacksons place on the tour............
I wonder will they bury him before they go on tour.
Quote from: Main Street on July 01, 2009, 12:28:38 PM
Nevertheless, Jackson's personal conduct did not meet even the common standard of decency. Much of his personal life centered around (prescribed) drugs and an obsession with children and childhood. By his own admission, Jackson repeatedly "slept" with unrelated children at his mansion in "Neverland". Perhaps as a form of compensation, those children and their families enjoyed luxurious benefits.
Are courts with juries the only way in which someone may be recognized as a pedophile? Is there no common definition that might apply based
on undisputed facts? if this was a priest would such leeway be given by the public? Nowadays pedophilia is high profile. Everyone is sensitive about it.
So if you sleep in the same bed as (an unrelated) child, you are a paedophile?
Quote from: Minder on July 01, 2009, 01:09:29 PM
All is not lost as there is talk of other Jackson family members taking Jacksons place on the tour............
I wonder will they bury him before they go on tour.
Jebus, they might even bring him. :o
Quote from: Hound on July 01, 2009, 01:19:32 PM
Quote from: Main Street on July 01, 2009, 12:28:38 PM
Nevertheless, Jackson's personal conduct did not meet even the common standard of decency. Much of his personal life centered around (prescribed) drugs and an obsession with children and childhood. By his own admission, Jackson repeatedly "slept" with unrelated children at his mansion in "Neverland". Perhaps as a form of compensation, those children and their families enjoyed luxurious benefits.
Are courts with juries the only way in which someone may be recognized as a pedophile? Is there no common definition that might apply based
on undisputed facts? if this was a priest would such leeway be given by the public? Nowadays pedophilia is high profile. Everyone is sensitive about it.
So if you sleep in the same bed as (an unrelated) child, you are a paedophile?
What circumstances exist that would say an adult man sleeping in the same bed as an unrelated child would be anything but totally inappropiate and wrong?
Quote from: Hound on July 01, 2009, 01:19:32 PM
Quote from: Main Street on July 01, 2009, 12:28:38 PM
Nevertheless, Jackson's personal conduct did not meet even the common standard of decency. Much of his personal life centered around (prescribed) drugs and an obsession with children and childhood. By his own admission, Jackson repeatedly "slept" with unrelated children at his mansion in "Neverland". Perhaps as a form of compensation, those children and their families enjoyed luxurious benefits.
Are courts with juries the only way in which someone may be recognized as a pedophile? Is there no common definition that might apply based
on undisputed facts? if this was a priest would such leeway be given by the public? Nowadays pedophilia is high profile. Everyone is sensitive about it.
So if you sleep in the same bed as (an unrelated) child, you are a paedophile?
Perhaps not - but you'd be hard pushed to find anyone who'd find that sort of behaviour acceptable.
Quote from: Hound on July 01, 2009, 01:19:32 PM
Quote from: Main Street on July 01, 2009, 12:28:38 PM
Nevertheless, Jackson's personal conduct did not meet even the common standard of decency. Much of his personal life centered around (prescribed) drugs and an obsession with children and childhood. By his own admission, Jackson repeatedly "slept" with unrelated children at his mansion in "Neverland". Perhaps as a form of compensation, those children and their families enjoyed luxurious benefits.
Are courts with juries the only way in which someone may be recognized as a pedophile? Is there no common definition that might apply based
on undisputed facts? if this was a priest would such leeway be given by the public? Nowadays pedophilia is high profile. Everyone is sensitive about it.
So if you sleep in the same bed as (an unrelated) child, you are a paedophile?
Hound you answer my question with another question.
My point was that there are some undisputed facts about Michael Jackson's habits - facts that numerous witness have testified to and
facts that Michael Jackson himself has publicly admitted. The question is: Are those facts sufficient to label Jackson as a pedophile? I am
not talking about any legal definition. Perhaps the facts do not meet the legal standard of the USA, or perhaps a jury gave more leeway to
Jackson than they would have given to, say, a Catholic priest. Still, we the general public, do have a lot of information - enough information to form our own opinion of the man.
The definition of pedophila is one who is sexually attracted to children.
By definition, sleeping in the same bed does not make definitive proof but it raises serious questions.
Coupled with the sexual abuse allegations from a number of sources most bought off before they could come to court, leaves a serious perception issue to minds of the public. I say that Jackson was given leeway because of his pop celebrity status.
A few moments silence in honour of MJ in the House of Representatives is totally inappropriate imo.
Another famous public figure Mohandas Ghandhii has never been found guilty of incestuous pedophilia in the courts, but does that mean that people cannot consider well documented and undisputed facts regarding his life lead to the inescapable conclusion that he was not
always the saint that he has been cracked up to be. Would it be wrong to call Mohandas Gandhi a pedophile even though no court of law ever
convicted him of that? He has been given a lot of leeway.
Quote from: Main Street on July 01, 2009, 01:53:10 PM
Another famous public figure Mohandas Ghandhii has never been found guilty of incestuous pedophilia in the courts, but does that mean that people cannot consider well documented and undisputed facts regarding his life lead to the inescapable conclusion that he was not
always the saint that he has been cracked up to be. Would it be wrong to call Mohandas Gandhi a pedophile even though no court of law ever
convicted him of that? He has been given a lot of leeway.
Huh, where did that come from?
Have I missed something, or were their rumours about Ghandhi's personal life?
ITV are gonna reshow 'living with Michael Jackson'
Quote from: ziggysego on July 01, 2009, 02:07:14 PM
Quote from: Main Street on July 01, 2009, 01:53:10 PM
Another famous public figure Mohandas Ghandhii has never been found guilty of incestuous pedophilia in the courts, but does that mean that people cannot consider well documented and undisputed facts regarding his life lead to the inescapable conclusion that he was not
always the saint that he has been cracked up to be. Would it be wrong to call Mohandas Gandhi a pedophile even though no court of law ever
convicted him of that? He has been given a lot of leeway.
Huh, where did that come from?
Have I missed something, or were their rumours about Ghandhi's personal life?
What's the big deal anyway about with this guy Ghandhi??
He made one good film ...................and was never heard of again!!! :D [shamelessly plagiarised from Trigger from Only Fools et al]
Quote from: stephenite on July 01, 2009, 01:37:33 PM
Quote from: Hound on July 01, 2009, 01:19:32 PM
Quote from: Main Street on July 01, 2009, 12:28:38 PM
Nevertheless, Jackson's personal conduct did not meet even the common standard of decency. Much of his personal life centered around (prescribed) drugs and an obsession with children and childhood. By his own admission, Jackson repeatedly "slept" with unrelated children at his mansion in "Neverland". Perhaps as a form of compensation, those children and their families enjoyed luxurious benefits.
Are courts with juries the only way in which someone may be recognized as a pedophile? Is there no common definition that might apply based
on undisputed facts? if this was a priest would such leeway be given by the public? Nowadays pedophilia is high profile. Everyone is sensitive about it.
So if you sleep in the same bed as (an unrelated) child, you are a paedophile?
Perhaps not - but you'd be hard pushed to find anyone who'd find that sort of behaviour acceptable.
But behaviour not being acceptable is a long way from behavious being criminal.
As somebody said on the previous Wacko thread, society seems to look for the badness in people rather than goodness/innocence.
Kids generally love sleepovers, whether it be with their parents or their friends.
My belief is that is all this was. Innocent. Unacceptable, naive and idiotic, but no harm meant.
From what I read there was no accusation of sexual intercourse, no physical evidence of abuse.
The accusations were of inappropriate touching, something that could not be proved, one person's word against another, so impossible for any of us to know the truth. But when I saw him interviewed on the subject he convinced me that he did no wrong to any child.
As for Gandhi. That's a new one for me!
Quote from: ziggysego on July 01, 2009, 02:07:14 PM
Quote from: Main Street on July 01, 2009, 01:53:10 PM
Another famous public figure Mohandas Ghandhii has never been found guilty of incestuous pedophilia in the courts, but does that mean that people cannot consider well documented and undisputed facts regarding his life lead to the inescapable conclusion that he was not
always the saint that he has been cracked up to be. Would it be wrong to call Mohandas Gandhi a pedophile even though no court of law ever
convicted him of that? He has been given a lot of leeway.
Huh, where did that come from?
Have I missed something, or were their rumours about Ghandhi's personal life?
No rumours,, but substantial facts.
Gandhi took the vow of brahmacharya, which means not only complete chastity but the elimination of sexual desire in his middle 30's.
He propagated this image and succeeded in elevating his image in the eyes of many Indian people to something akin to sainthood.
It is well documented that Gandhi slept with naked teen-aged girls including his 13 yo niece.
Gandhi claimed that it was to bolster his "self-control".
His personal life was beset with child abuse allegations and adultery with 12 year old girls.
Quite a lot revealed by his grandsons
"Sexual Antics of Gandhi:" An anthology or research based on the books by Gandhi's grandsons.
"Gandhi's Girls":- very comprehensive Time Magazine article.
Relevance is that that many people chose not to have their image of this man besmirched by these facts.
Quote from: Hound on July 01, 2009, 03:28:11 PM
Quote from: stephenite on July 01, 2009, 01:37:33 PM
Quote from: Hound on July 01, 2009, 01:19:32 PM
Quote from: Main Street on July 01, 2009, 12:28:38 PM
Nevertheless, Jackson's personal conduct did not meet even the common standard of decency. Much of his personal life centered around (prescribed) drugs and an obsession with children and childhood. By his own admission, Jackson repeatedly "slept" with unrelated children at his mansion in "Neverland". Perhaps as a form of compensation, those children and their families enjoyed luxurious benefits.
Are courts with juries the only way in which someone may be recognized as a pedophile? Is there no common definition that might apply based
on undisputed facts? if this was a priest would such leeway be given by the public? Nowadays pedophilia is high profile. Everyone is sensitive about it.
So if you sleep in the same bed as (an unrelated) child, you are a paedophile?
Perhaps not - but you'd be hard pushed to find anyone who'd find that sort of behaviour acceptable.
But behaviour not being acceptable is a long way from behavious being criminal.
As somebody said on the previous Wacko thread, society seems to look for the badness in people rather than goodness/innocence.
Kids generally love sleepovers, whether it be with their parents or their friends.
My belief is that is all this was. Innocent. Unacceptable, naive and idiotic, but no harm meant.
From what I read there was no accusation of sexual intercourse, no physical evidence of abuse.
The accusations were of inappropriate touching, something that could not be proved, one person's word against another, so impossible for any of us to know the truth. But when I saw him interviewed on the subject he convinced me that he did no wrong to any child.
As for Gandhi. That's a new one for me!
These were the actions of a 40 yo man
You have a belief strongly based on one interview with him.
Fine
If these allegations were about a priest or an adult in charge of boy scouts on a camping trip, would you have a different perspective?
Quote from: Main Street on July 01, 2009, 03:32:30 PM
Quote from: ziggysego on July 01, 2009, 02:07:14 PM
Quote from: Main Street on July 01, 2009, 01:53:10 PM
Another famous public figure Mohandas Ghandhii has never been found guilty of incestuous pedophilia in the courts, but does that mean that people cannot consider well documented and undisputed facts regarding his life lead to the inescapable conclusion that he was not
always the saint that he has been cracked up to be. Would it be wrong to call Mohandas Gandhi a pedophile even though no court of law ever
convicted him of that? He has been given a lot of leeway.
Huh, where did that come from?
Have I missed something, or were their rumours about Ghandhi's personal life?
No rumours,, but substantial facts.
Gandhi took the vow of brahmacharya, which means not only complete chastity but the elimination of sexual desire in his middle 30's.
He propagated this image and succeeded in elevating his image in the eyes of many Indian people to something akin to sainthood.
It is well documented that Gandhi slept with naked teen-aged girls including his 13 yo niece.
Gandhi claimed that it was to bolster his "self-control".
His personal life was beset with child abuse allegations and adultery with 12 year old girls.
Quite a lot revealed by his grandsons
"Sexual Antics of Gandhi:" An anthology or research based on the books by Gandhi's grandsons.
"Gandhi's Girls":- very comprehensive Time Magazine article.
Relevance is that that many people chose not to have their image of this man besmirched by these facts.
First I've heard of this. If it is fact as you say, then it completely changes my opinions of him.
Quote from: Main Street on July 01, 2009, 03:39:54 PM
You have a belief strongly based on one interview with him.
Fine
If these allegations were about a priest or an adult in charge of boy scouts on a camping trip, would you have a different perspective?
Based on one interview, the fact that there was no physical evidence, and that the allegations seemed to have arisen some time after the alleged events took place.
What are your beliefs based on?
Quote from: Hound on July 01, 2009, 03:28:11 PM
As somebody said on the previous Wacko thread, society seems to look for the badness in people rather than goodness/innocence.
Kids generally love sleepovers, whether it be with their parents or their friends.
My belief is that is all this was. Innocent. Unacceptable, naive and idiotic, but no harm meant.
From what I read there was no accusation of sexual intercourse, no physical evidence of abuse.
As i said in the MJ thread if he wasnt sexually active then it might have some credance 9not saying that i would approve), but the man had 3 kids so obviously had some sexual experiance. The sleepover that kids love dont generally ( i hope) involve people with sexual activity or im sure the parents wouldnt allow it!
Hound if you had a kid would you let MJ join them in a sleep over?
Quote from: ludermor on July 01, 2009, 04:12:43 PM
Quote from: Hound on July 01, 2009, 03:28:11 PM
As somebody said on the previous Wacko thread, society seems to look for the badness in people rather than goodness/innocence.
Kids generally love sleepovers, whether it be with their parents or their friends.
My belief is that is all this was. Innocent. Unacceptable, naive and idiotic, but no harm meant.
From what I read there was no accusation of sexual intercourse, no physical evidence of abuse.
As i said in the MJ thread if he wasnt sexually active then it might have some credance 9not saying that i would approve), but the man had 3 kids so obviously had some sexual experiance. The sleepover that kids love dont generally ( i hope) involve people with sexual activity or im sure the parents wouldnt allow it!
Hound if you had a kid would you let MJ join them in a sleep over?
3 very very white kids!!!
Cant deny that.
Wait a minute....... isn't MJ white?? :o
Quote from: Hound on July 01, 2009, 04:03:19 PM
Quote from: Main Street on July 01, 2009, 03:39:54 PM
You have a belief strongly based on one interview with him.
Fine
If these allegations were about a priest or an adult in charge of boy scouts on a camping trip, would you have a different perspective?
Based on one interview, the fact that there was no physical evidence, and that the allegations seemed to have arisen some time after the alleged events took place.
What are your beliefs based on?
You have a strange manner of not answering a direct question.
My contention is MJ was allowed a lot of leeway because he was a pop celeb. My question is very simple, would you have a different perspective
about the same admission and allegations, that an adult in charge of boy scouts on a camping trip admitted to have slept with boys on that camping trip regularily, gave gifts to boys. And a few cases against the hypothetical Boy Scout leader, including the evidence, did not come to court because the main accuser was paid off.
Quote
Adams "thinking out loud "was part stimulated after reading a report in the Sun. He peddled a conspiracy, when the known and established facts in this case alone make bizarre reading. Adams did not add anything of substance to the event except to push his own agenda just as you are pushing your conspiracy agendas,
Your ignorance of Mike Adams is obvious and then you go on your own conspiracy rant.
Disappointed that your Chappaquiddick bait did not catch the fish you expected?
Main street,
I suppose the benefit of the doubt is given by some of us due to the insight offered into jacksons own childish nature by the media and in particular, the Martin bashir interview. If I was on a jury, and the evidence presented to me was what hound references, I'd have found him not guilty. Stupid, childish, naive and poorly advised yes, but nit guilty.
As for your question about a priest, well I suppose given the accurate history in this country, my first reaction would be typically knee jerk. I'd probably know a lot less about the lifestyles and habits of a random priest than one of the most documented figures in the world, so the comparison while it makes a point, doesn't really stand.
By the way, is there really a book called "the sexual antics of ghandi"? That's fecking funny shit right there.
Quote from: Puckoon on July 01, 2009, 06:01:13 PM
Main street,
I suppose the benefit of the doubt is given by some of us due to the insight offered into jacksons own childish nature by the media and in particular, the Martin bashir interview. If I was on a jury, and the evidence presented to me was what hound references, I'd have found him not guilty. Stupid, childish, naive and poorly advised yes, but nit guilty.
As for your question about a priest, well I suppose given the accurate history in this country, my first reaction would be typically knee jerk. I'd probably know a lot less about the lifestyles and habits of a random priest than one of the most documented figures in the world, so the comparison while it makes a point, doesn't really stand.
Would you not ask which priest?
It should be about reality rather than perceptions.
Quote from: Seamus on June 30, 2009, 11:58:18 PM
pharmaceutical drugs- as opposed to the other sort of drug ?
QuoteMike Adams was thinking out loud, far better than following blindly. My point is that more people should do likewise and not be afraid of the probable ridicule that may accompany it.
is the only option to thinking out loud following blindly?
QuoteI know full well that the vast majority of people disagree with my opinions on world affairs. I completely understand as I too was conditioned. It's the opposite as it empowers me, something that you are incapable of understanding going by your responses thus far
first up- I'm not sure that we have seen much of your opinion on world affairs.
Conditioned isn't really the word you're looking for - lazy is probably closer.
I'm also not sure how you feel I am incapable of understanding that you believe your world view empowers you- as concepts go its not really what you would call the most complex now is it?
QuoteThis is probably the first time you have heard of Mike Adams yet you have already judged him.
mike adams and his ilk have been peddling a pared down version of the truth for a long time. He falls into many of the same category of snake oil vendor as many of the pharma companies he lambasts. He did not cure himself of diabetes either, he simply controlled his diet and health so that his insulin levels were controlled by diet and exercise rather than drugs- this is not a cure. And yes I judged him but thats mostly because I went to his health ranger website first to see what he had to say about himself rather than what you have to say about him.
QuoteFunny how you call me a conspiracy theorist when you believe in one of the biggest conspiracy theories of them all, the official 911 fairytale. Hopefully you are not one of the people that still believes in the Oswald "lone nut theory". Then there's global warming, now called climate change. What do you thing of the Cap and Trade Bill passed in the House and now heading for the Senate soon to be signed into law by the messiah Abomination? The crap is hitting us between the eyes yet some still cannot see.
Ah is this the world view you were talking about? where to begin?
the official 911 fairytale? dont get me started- or if you do please at least read popular mechanics- there's a lot unexplained yes- there is insufficient evidence for your conspiracy as yet.
Oswald- lone nut- physically impossible- next
global warming- cap and trade- what's your point? did the dinosaurs farts cause the ice age, planets and all spacebodies go through phases and cycles- or maybe you're telling me that God created the world in 6 days four thousand years ago?
Messiah abomination- come on- you're making this too easy- are you referring to Barack Obama? what are you implying?
the crap- oh yes, there is crap all right...
Oh and I think its the huffing rather than calling bullshit thats the issue
...and did you know that MJ stopped for a KFC in Blanchardstown, Dublin, in late 2006.....gem of a story and true.
...must resist jokes.
"The Dubliner also recalled another humorous incident that makes him smile even now, three years later. "We were in Dublin one time, he was up on business and he wanted to get the children a treat of Kentucky chicken. So we went to the nearest drive through in Blanchardstown and parked up in the car park and had KFC. I laugh about that now. I had dinner with Michael Jackson," he chuckled."
http://www.westmeathexaminer.ie/news/mullingar/articles/2009/06/30/41090-gentleman-jackson--westmeath-chauffeur-recalls-star/ (http://www.westmeathexaminer.ie/news/mullingar/articles/2009/06/30/41090-gentleman-jackson--westmeath-chauffeur-recalls-star/)
Quote from: heganboy on July 01, 2009, 09:54:17 PM
Quote from: Seamus on June 30, 2009, 11:58:18 PM
pharmaceutical drugs- as opposed to the other sort of drug ?
QuoteMike Adams was thinking out loud, far better than following blindly. My point is that more people should do likewise and not be afraid of the probable ridicule that may accompany it.
is the only option to thinking out loud following blindly?
QuoteI know full well that the vast majority of people disagree with my opinions on world affairs. I completely understand as I too was conditioned. It's the opposite as it empowers me, something that you are incapable of understanding going by your responses thus far
first up- I'm not sure that we have seen much of your opinion on world affairs.
Conditioned isn't really the word you're looking for - lazy is probably closer.
I'm also not sure how you feel I am incapable of understanding that you believe your world view empowers you- as concepts go its not really what you would call the most complex now is it?
QuoteThis is probably the first time you have heard of Mike Adams yet you have already judged him.
mike adams and his ilk have been peddling a pared down version of the truth for a long time. He falls into many of the same category of snake oil vendor as many of the pharma companies he lambasts. He did not cure himself of diabetes either, he simply controlled his diet and health so that his insulin levels were controlled by diet and exercise rather than drugs- this is not a cure. And yes I judged him but thats mostly because I went to his health ranger website first to see what he had to say about himself rather than what you have to say about him.
QuoteFunny how you call me a conspiracy theorist when you believe in one of the biggest conspiracy theories of them all, the official 911 fairytale. Hopefully you are not one of the people that still believes in the Oswald "lone nut theory". Then there's global warming, now called climate change. What do you thing of the Cap and Trade Bill passed in the House and now heading for the Senate soon to be signed into law by the messiah Abomination? The crap is hitting us between the eyes yet some still cannot see.
Ah is this the world view you were talking about? where to begin?
the official 911 fairytale? dont get me started- or if you do please at least read popular mechanics- there's a lot unexplained yes- there is insufficient evidence for your conspiracy as yet.
Oswald- lone nut- physically impossible- next
global warming- cap and trade- what's your point? did the dinosaurs farts cause the ice age, planets and all spacebodies go through phases and cycles- or maybe you're telling me that God created the world in 6 days four thousand years ago?
Messiah abomination- come on- you're making this too easy- are you referring to Barack Obama? what are you implying?
the crap- oh yes, there is crap all right...
Oh and I think its the huffing rather than calling bullshit thats the issue
I have read Popular Mechanics, a child could see through the lies and disinformation. Insufficient evidence that 911 was an inside job? There is more evidence available than for any crime in history, now you're being extremely lazy.
The Global Warming conspiracy is a hoax, you obviously have no idea what The Cap and Trade Bill HR 2454 is judging by your reply.
I thought Bush was bad but Obama is Bush on steroids. You must have been fully asleep for the past six months. You're bad enough when half asleep.
If you decide to reply at least have half an understanding of what I'm portraying.
QuoteIf you decide to reply at least have half an understanding of what I'm portraying.
Seamus- your problem is that you have less than half an understanding of what you're portraying.
your concept of "evidence" is actually speculation
Obama is Bush on steroids- even a hint of context would be nice
Global warming- whatever- cap and trade bill- I'm all on for trading anything that makes a profit- back to you...
Can I suggest a clearer statement of your positions next time, and have you given up on your latest fad Mike Adams already?
Keeping off topic for a sec:
Seamus, can you explain to me what did happen re 911. Which is presumably different to the common perception that it was masterminded by Al Qaeda and Osama.
Quote from: Hound on July 02, 2009, 07:13:11 PM
Keeping off topic for a sec:
Seamus, can you explain to me what did happen re 911. Which is presumably different to the common perception that it was masterminded by Al Qaeda and Osama.
It was an insurance fraud for the twin towers; the titanic never sank it was her sister ship; we are all rulled by the Aluminadi and there are one eye bug creatures watching us from the heavens. :D
Quote from: Hound on July 02, 2009, 07:13:11 PM
Keeping off topic for a sec:
Seamus, can you explain to me what did happen re 911. Which is presumably different to the common perception that it was masterminded by Al Qaeda and Osama.
Hound the amount of people that do not believe the insane Official Story may surprise you and it's growing daily. The evidence is substantial with zero speculation while on the other hand the ridicules fairytale we were given cannot hold up to the slightest bit of scrutiny. Plenty whistle blowers have also come forward. With so much evidence I wouldn't know where to start so it's best you do you own research.
Quote from: Puckoon on July 01, 2009, 06:01:13 PM
Main street,
I suppose the benefit of the doubt is given by some of us due to the insight offered into jacksons own childish nature by the media and in particular, the Martin bashir interview. If I was on a jury, and the evidence presented to me was what hound references, I'd have found him not guilty. Stupid, childish, naive and poorly advised yes, but nit guilty.
As for your question about a priest, well I suppose given the accurate history in this country, my first reaction would be typically knee jerk. I'd probably know a lot less about the lifestyles and habits of a random priest than one of the most documented figures in the world, so the comparison while it makes a point, doesn't really stand.
Consider that there were cases that did not come to court.
Also consider if it was a boy scout leader sleeping with children in his care and giving them gifts, would he have received such leeway as
was certainly given to MJ.
Much of your opinion would be on that interview. I´d have absolutely no opinion from that interview if he was capable of sexual attraction towards young boys. Even if he did he would be able to disguise it. It would not come out in such an interview. His childishness was his developed way to protect himself from people hurting him.
The only reason I would venture an opinion on the Jackson kid was because the House of Congress was paying him high tribute.
Regardless of the courts verdict, in the case that did manage to come before it, there is too much grey innapropriate area for this lad to be receiving such a tribute.
The grey area may not have been enough to castigate him but it is enough to keep him warily away with a long stick.
QuoteThe grey area may not have been enough to castigate him but it is enough to keep him warily away with a long stick.
Unless MJ's gonna resurrect á la thriller, you won't need the long stick.
Quote from: Seamus on July 02, 2009, 08:24:54 PM
Quote from: Hound on July 02, 2009, 07:13:11 PM
Keeping off topic for a sec:
Seamus, can you explain to me what did happen re 911. Which is presumably different to the common perception that it was masterminded by Al Qaeda and Osama.
Hound the amount of people that do not believe the insane Official Story may surprise you and it's growing daily. The evidence is substantial with zero speculation while on the other hand the ridicules fairytale we were given cannot hold up to the slightest bit of scrutiny. Plenty whistle blowers have also come forward. With so much evidence I wouldn't know where to start so it's best you do you own research.
Well there's scores of different theories, was just wondering who you thought was behind it if it wasnt the Al Qaeda terrorists who claimed it.
OK Hound, I give you the main players. I'm not going further into this as I'll be here for months replying to others and I do not have the time for that. I have done months upon months of research looking at both sides of the equation. For my troubles fighting for my rights and all our rights I'm on the No Fly List. At this time I'm unable to go home. I know what its like to be put into Free Speech Zones and being part of peaceful protest groups infiltrated with provocateurs in order to instill violence. I am considered a terrorist because I question my government. That is where The Patriot Acts and The 2006 Military Commissions Act has gotten us.
The main players:
The Military Industrial Complex, the CIA and Mossad with help from The FBI, MI6 and ISI. A number of high level politicians, the same cronies that are part of US Government over the last 40 years including Giuliani in NY were also involved. Old Bush and Cheney at the top of the list. Bin Laden disclaimed involvement the day after and Al Qaeda is an arm of the CIA.
Several members of this board will get upset at this post as it takes them away from their beliefs and out of their comfort zone. I'm suffering for my quest for the truth but I will not give up. I ask members to at least respect that. Im not replying to any responses to this post. I'll finish with a quote from Mark Twain:
"In times of change, the Patriot is a scarce man; brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
I would reply Seamus but I am gobsmacked
What, when did he die this is news to me, is this a wind up???????
Bored!!!!!!!!!
Quote from: Seamus on July 03, 2009, 08:57:51 PM
OK Hound, I give you the main players. I'm not going further into this as I'll be here for months replying to others and I do not have the time for that. I have done months upon months of research looking at both sides of the equation. For my troubles fighting for my rights and all our rights I'm on the No Fly List. At this time I'm unable to go home. I know what its like to be put into Free Speech Zones and being part of peaceful protest groups infiltrated with provocateurs in order to instill violence. I am considered a terrorist because I question my government. That is where The Patriot Acts and The 2006 Military Commissions Act has gotten us.
The main players:
The Military Industrial Complex, the CIA and Mossad with help from The FBI, MI6 and ISI. A number of high level politicians, the same cronies that are part of US Government over the last 40 years including Giuliani in NY were also involved. Old Bush and Cheney at the top of the list. Bin Laden disclaimed involvement the day after and Al Qaeda is an arm of the CIA.
Several members of this board will get upset at this post as it takes them away from their beliefs and out of their comfort zone. I'm suffering for my quest for the truth but I will not give up. I ask members to at least respect that. Im not replying to any responses to this post. I'll finish with a quote from Mark Twain:
"In times of change, the Patriot is a scarce man; brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
You've been watching too many Oliver Stone movies.
Quote from: lob her in lad on July 03, 2009, 09:43:19 PM
What, when did he die this is news to me, is this a wind up???????
Bored!!!!!!!!!
Who is Michael Jackson, he has some songs out recently or in the past or something? Help me out here.
http://www.ismichaeljacksonstillalive.com/
Quote from: Trevor Hill on July 04, 2009, 12:35:42 AM
http://www.ismichaeljacksonstillalive.com/
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Quote from: Seamus on July 03, 2009, 08:57:51 PM
OK Hound, I give you the main players. I'm not going further into this as I'll be here for months replying to others and I do not have the time for that. I have done months upon months of research looking at both sides of the equation. For my troubles fighting for my rights and all our rights I'm on the No Fly List. At this time I'm unable to go home. I know what its like to be put into Free Speech Zones and being part of peaceful protest groups infiltrated with provocateurs in order to instill violence. I am considered a terrorist because I question my government. That is where The Patriot Acts and The 2006 Military Commissions Act has gotten us.
The main players:
The Military Industrial Complex, the CIA and Mossad with help from The FBI, MI6 and ISI. A number of high level politicians, the same cronies that are part of US Government over the last 40 years including Giuliani in NY were also involved. Old Bush and Cheney at the top of the list. Bin Laden disclaimed involvement the day after and Al Qaeda is an arm of the CIA.
Several members of this board will get upset at this post as it takes them away from their beliefs and out of their comfort zone. I'm suffering for my quest for the truth but I will not give up. I ask members to at least respect that. Im not replying to any responses to this post. I'll finish with a quote from Mark Twain:
"In times of change, the Patriot is a scarce man; brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
Oh right, I get it now. You're grounded!! At least Mom and Pop still let you use the compute.r :D :D :D :D :D
Quote from: Seamus on July 03, 2009, 08:57:51 PM
I'm on the No Fly List. At this time I'm unable to go home...
I am considered a terrorist because I question my government.
What government does not let its own citizens enter their country?
which government is yours, and where do you consider home?
Yet again, clear as mud from our enlightened, both sides of the equation friend...
Did any of yiz win a ticket to the funeral?
Bigger gig than U2 in Croker they reckon!
Michael Jackson singles now make up almost 30% of the UK Top 40 this week. ::)
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on July 05, 2009, 09:22:23 PM
Quote from: ziggysego on July 05, 2009, 08:52:24 PM
Michael Jackson singles now make up almost 30% of the UK Top 40 this week. ::)
Kurt Cobain must be getting pissed off...
Think of Joe Dolan!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Michael sightings have begun.... ::)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Am67-Sew7k (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Am67-Sew7k)
Anyone watching the memorial service?
Saw a bit of it. Christ almightly!
Quote from: maggie on July 07, 2009, 08:15:44 PM
Anyone watching the memorial service?
Good show if a litte surreal.
Watching it here in work ... only in America :P
See that wee lad from Britains Got Talent is singing at it.
I do think its a nice touch the way all the brothers are wearing a trademark MJ glove.
Quote from: red hander on July 07, 2009, 08:20:39 PM
Watching it here in work ... only in America :P
No doubt bout that.
'We Are The World' ... gimme a bucket, somebody gimme a bucket please!!!
Quote from: red hander on July 07, 2009, 08:27:46 PM
'We Are The World' ... gimme a bucket, somebody gimme a bucket please!!!
Does your remote control not work?
I loved the preacher - the Bible thumper. He would fair keep you awake at mass ! ;)
Thought that whole 'show' was surprisingly excellent.
Where the burial at ?
Quote from: The Real Laoislad on July 07, 2009, 08:29:22 PM
Quote from: red hander on July 07, 2009, 08:27:46 PM
'We Are The World' ... gimme a bucket, somebody gimme a bucket please!!!
Does your remote control not work?
Nah, I'm in work, the TV's about five metres off the ground and everyone else is watching it
Quote from: red hander on July 07, 2009, 10:01:47 PM
Quote from: The Real Laoislad on July 07, 2009, 08:29:22 PM
Quote from: red hander on July 07, 2009, 08:27:46 PM
'We Are The World' ... gimme a bucket, somebody gimme a bucket please!!!
Does your remote control not work?
Nah, I'm in work, the TV's about five metres off the ground and everyone else is watching it
Sounds like a productive job watcing the Michael Jackson funeral while typing into a GAA diuscussion board on the interweb, and to think the f**kers haven't provided you with a remote for the TV. ;)
I didn't know Jackson had as many friends in the entertainment industry...................
Quote from: orangeman on July 07, 2009, 08:42:52 PM
Where the burial at ?
Forest Lawn Memorial Park, LA..... apparently.
Do ye reckon the body was in the casket brought to the Staples Center?
Have to say the memorial was very fitting, his daughter spoke very well.
Quote from: Barney on July 08, 2009, 10:49:22 AM
Do ye reckon the body was in the casket brought to the Staples Center?
I would say he was in the ground and all by the time they got to the staples centre.
I felt pretty sick through the whole thing to be honest from the news broke to that crap yesterday and I tried to avoid it as much as possible.
Quote from: Doogie Browser on July 08, 2009, 11:11:20 AM
Have to say the memorial was very fitting, his daughter spoke very well.
It was probably someone from an acting agency, nobody would have known any differently because they always had a veil over their face
Quote from: Minder on July 08, 2009, 11:53:06 AM
Quote from: Doogie Browser on July 08, 2009, 11:11:20 AM
Have to say the memorial was very fitting, his daughter spoke very well.
It was probably someone from an acting agency, nobody would have known any differently because they always had a veil over their face
No in recent years they didnt wear the veil.
In life the man paid off two families who claimed Jackson had molested their sons. I for one wont be lamenting his loss.
The revered Al Sharpton, the mouthy preacher someone liked earlier is nothing but a hypocritical slabber, worse than Jesse Jackson, they both show up wherever the is a bit of publicity to be found.
Only in American can you be acquitted by buying off the families of the children who suffered at a paedo's hands. In this country it seems that if you have money you can buy your way out of anything. Shame.
I have to agree with you stew, stomach wasn't good listening to all that.
As for Al Sharpton.... WTF? I was half expecting him to claim that Jackson ended slavery in the USA too!
Quote from: Barney on July 08, 2009, 10:49:22 AM
Do ye reckon the body was in the casket brought to the Staples Center?
Thought the same thing myself,I was half expecting some crazed fan to make a run for the coffin at the end
Quote from: stew on July 08, 2009, 04:19:04 PM
In life the man paid off two families who claimed Jackson had molested their sons. I for one wont be lamenting his loss.
The revered Al Sharpton, the mouthy preacher someone liked earlier is nothing but a hypocritical slabber, worse than Jesse Jackson, they both show up wherever the is a bit of publicity to be found.
Only in American can you be acquitted by buying off the families of the children who suffered at a paedo's hands. In this country it seems that if you have money you can buy your way out of anything. Shame.
I wonder if any of the Mods will have anything to say about this comment...
Quote from: SidelineKick on July 08, 2009, 04:47:39 PM
Quote from: stew on July 08, 2009, 04:19:04 PM
In life the man paid off two families who claimed Jackson had molested their sons. I for one wont be lamenting his loss.
The revered Al Sharpton, the mouthy preacher someone liked earlier is nothing but a hypocritical slabber, worse than Jesse Jackson, they both show up wherever the is a bit of publicity to be found.
Only in American can you be acquitted by buying off the families of the children who suffered at a paedo's hands. In this country it seems that if you have money you can buy your way out of anything. Shame.
I wonder if any of the Mods will have anything to say about this comment...
It is an idiotic comment.
I read recently where Slash was in studio working on a couple of Jackson's songs he asked about the ridiculous amount of equipment lying around. He was told that Jackson (or at least his producers) rented the most expensive of everything they could get their hands on even if there was no chance of ever using it. When Slash commented that it was a waste of money he was told that at that moment there were another ten studios all over the States booked up and kitted out similarly just in case Michael felt 'inspired' to record in another city.
When he asked about paying off the law suits he was told that Michael said to pay them, money was what they wanted and it was just easier than going to court.
Quote from: SidelineKick on July 08, 2009, 04:47:39 PM
Quote from: stew on July 08, 2009, 04:19:04 PM
In life the man paid off two families who claimed Jackson had molested their sons. I for one wont be lamenting his loss.
The revered Al Sharpton, the mouthy preacher someone liked earlier is nothing but a hypocritical slabber, worse than Jesse Jackson, they both show up wherever the is a bit of publicity to be found.
Only in American can you be acquitted by buying off the families of the children who suffered at a paedo's hands. In this country it seems that if you have money you can buy your way out of anything. Shame.
I wonder if any of the Mods will have anything to say about this comment...
There seems to be an ignorance on board on what constitutes libel. Mod earlier warned of 'libelous' remarks about Jackson. DEAD MEN CANNOT SUE -ie: be libelled. While it might seem cowardly or distasteful (to some) it ain't libellous.
Check out remarks by Peter King from American press and websites...
"A New York congressman says Michael Jackson was a "pervert" and calls on society to stop "glorifying" the late entertainer in a YouTube video.
Rep. Peter King said Jackson -- whom he called a "low-life" -- is being glorified in the days after his death while society ignores the efforts, of teachers, police officers, firefighters and veterans. In the two-minute video, King claims the "day in and day out" coverage of Jackson's death is "too politically correct."
"Let's knock out the psychobabble," King said in the video taped outside an American Legion Hall on New York's Long Island. "He was a pervert, a child molester; he was a pedophile. And to be giving this much coverage to him, day in and day out, what does it say about us as a country? I just think we're too politically correct."
King, a Republican who is among the possible contenders for the seat held by Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, said Jackson "may have been a good singer" and "did some dancing," but blasted the singer as someone who could not be trusted around children.
"There's nothing good to say about this guy," King continued. "But the bottom line is, would you let your child or grandchild be in the same room as Michael Jackson?"
Quote from: longrunsthefox on July 08, 2009, 06:33:46 PM
Quote from: SidelineKick on July 08, 2009, 04:47:39 PM
Quote from: stew on July 08, 2009, 04:19:04 PM
In life the man paid off two families who claimed Jackson had molested their sons. I for one wont be lamenting his loss.
The revered Al Sharpton, the mouthy preacher someone liked earlier is nothing but a hypocritical slabber, worse than Jesse Jackson, they both show up wherever the is a bit of publicity to be found.
Only in American can you be acquitted by buying off the families of the children who suffered at a paedo's hands. In this country it seems that if you have money you can buy your way out of anything. Shame.
I wonder if any of the Mods will have anything to say about this comment...
There seems to be an ignorance on board on what constitutes libel. Mod earlier warned of 'libelous' remarks about Jackson. DEAD MEN CANNOT SUE -ie: be libelled. While it might seem cowardly or distasteful (to some) it ain't libellous.
Check out remarks by Peter King from American press and websites...
"A New York congressman says Michael Jackson was a "pervert" and calls on society to stop "glorifying" the late entertainer in a YouTube video.
Rep. Peter King said Jackson -- whom he called a "low-life" -- is being glorified in the days after his death while society ignores the efforts, of teachers, police officers, firefighters and veterans. In the two-minute video, King claims the "day in and day out" coverage of Jackson's death is "too politically correct."
"Let's knock out the psychobabble," King said in the video taped outside an American Legion Hall on New York's Long Island. "He was a pervert, a child molester; he was a pedophile. And to be giving this much coverage to him, day in and day out, what does it say about us as a country? I just think we're too politically correct."
King, a Republican who is among the possible contenders for the seat held by Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, said Jackson "may have been a good singer" and "did some dancing," but blasted the singer as someone who could not be trusted around children.
"There's nothing good to say about this guy," King continued. "But the bottom line is, would you let your child or grandchild be in the same room as Michael Jackson?"
So if you posted the same about oh say St Patrick you reckon no one should have a problem because technically he died and can't sue?
Quote from: longrunsthefox on July 08, 2009, 06:33:46 PM
Quote from: SidelineKick on July 08, 2009, 04:47:39 PM
Quote from: stew on July 08, 2009, 04:19:04 PM
In life the man paid off two families who claimed Jackson had molested their sons. I for one wont be lamenting his loss.
The revered Al Sharpton, the mouthy preacher someone liked earlier is nothing but a hypocritical slabber, worse than Jesse Jackson, they both show up wherever the is a bit of publicity to be found.
Only in American can you be acquitted by buying off the families of the children who suffered at a paedo's hands. In this country it seems that if you have money you can buy your way out of anything. Shame.
I wonder if any of the Mods will have anything to say about this comment...
There seems to be an ignorance on board on what constitutes libel. Mod earlier warned of 'libelous' remarks about Jackson. DEAD MEN CANNOT SUE -ie: be libelled. While it might seem cowardly or distasteful (to some) it ain't libellous.
Check out remarks by Peter King from American press and websites...
"A New York congressman says Michael Jackson was a "pervert" and calls on society to stop "glorifying" the late entertainer in a YouTube video.
Rep. Peter King said Jackson -- whom he called a "low-life" -- is being glorified in the days after his death while society ignores the efforts, of teachers, police officers, firefighters and veterans. In the two-minute video, King claims the "day in and day out" coverage of Jackson's death is "too politically correct."
"Let's knock out the psychobabble," King said in the video taped outside an American Legion Hall on New York's Long Island. "He was a pervert, a child molester; he was a pedophile. And to be giving this much coverage to him, day in and day out, what does it say about us as a country? I just think we're too politically correct."
King, a Republican who is among the possible contenders for the seat held by Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, said Jackson "may have been a good singer" and "did some dancing," but blasted the singer as someone who could not be trusted around children.
"There's nothing good to say about this guy," King continued. "But the bottom line is, would you let your child or grandchild be in the same room as Michael Jackson?"
Now that he's in the ground and the 'don't speak ill of the dead' period starts coming to an end, I think the media are gonna dig up a hell of a lot of muck on him. The way the guy behaved round kids was totally creepy, that can't be denied. The fact that he was willing to splash out money willy-nilly on anything from studios and equipment to paying off the families of those kids he was alleged to have abused probably prevented the media reporting some of the dirt they had on him for fear this same money would have been used on libel actions ... now that threat is gone the gloves will come off big-style IMO.
i was very surprised there were no stories came out day after his death.
Noone has claimed he is the father of their child
Noone has slept with him
no one has claimed they were molested
any thoughts on why?
Any paper that had the story would clean up this week with all the hype over the last few days
Quote from: red hander on July 08, 2009, 07:03:05 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on July 08, 2009, 06:33:46 PM
Quote from: SidelineKick on July 08, 2009, 04:47:39 PM
Quote from: stew on July 08, 2009, 04:19:04 PM
In life the man paid off two families who claimed Jackson had molested their sons. I for one wont be lamenting his loss.
The revered Al Sharpton, the mouthy preacher someone liked earlier is nothing but a hypocritical slabber, worse than Jesse Jackson, they both show up wherever the is a bit of publicity to be found.
Only in American can you be acquitted by buying off the families of the children who suffered at a paedo's hands. In this country it seems that if you have money you can buy your way out of anything. Shame.
I wonder if any of the Mods will have anything to say about this comment...
There seems to be an ignorance on board on what constitutes libel. Mod earlier warned of 'libelous' remarks about Jackson. DEAD MEN CANNOT SUE -ie: be libelled. While it might seem cowardly or distasteful (to some) it ain't libellous.
Check out remarks by Peter King from American press and websites...
"A New York congressman says Michael Jackson was a "pervert" and calls on society to stop "glorifying" the late entertainer in a YouTube video.
Rep. Peter King said Jackson -- whom he called a "low-life" -- is being glorified in the days after his death while society ignores the efforts, of teachers, police officers, firefighters and veterans. In the two-minute video, King claims the "day in and day out" coverage of Jackson's death is "too politically correct."
"Let's knock out the psychobabble," King said in the video taped outside an American Legion Hall on New York's Long Island. "He was a pervert, a child molester; he was a pedophile. And to be giving this much coverage to him, day in and day out, what does it say about us as a country? I just think we're too politically correct."
King, a Republican who is among the possible contenders for the seat held by Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, said Jackson "may have been a good singer" and "did some dancing," but blasted the singer as someone who could not be trusted around children.
"There's nothing good to say about this guy," King continued. "But the bottom line is, would you let your child or grandchild be in the same room as Michael Jackson?"
Now that he's in the ground and the 'don't speak ill of the dead' period starts coming to an end, I think the media are gonna dig up a hell of a lot of muck on him. The way the guy behaved round kids was totally creepy, that can't be denied. The fact that he was willing to splash out money willy-nilly on anything from studios and equipment to paying off the families of those kids he was alleged to have abused probably prevented the media reporting some of the dirt they had on him for fear this same money would have been used on libel actions ... now that threat is gone the gloves will come off big-style IMO.
the white gloves?
as for buying people off, surely these families that let their precious kids stay with a man, with issues would have pursued a Paedo regardless of the amount of money given to them to shut them up???
had Jackson been found guilty then the families would have got the same money if not more and Jackson would have been behind bars. for me that would have been a better way of putting closure on the debate once and for all
Quote from: ziggysego on July 08, 2009, 04:44:19 PM
I have to agree with you stew, stomach wasn't good listening to all that.
As for Al Sharpton.... WTF? I was half expecting him to claim that Jackson ended slavery in the USA too!
Why on earth would you sit through it when you claim he was an evil man with evil ways and will meet his maker?
No one made you do it i'm sure. I can't think of one reason why I'd watch a memorial service for someone I disliked or abhorred.
Talk about going out of your way to be offended/disgusted.
Apparently its an indispensable part of the gaa culture to go out of their way to be grossly offended by some event (eg a football match) and forget about the remote control option
I didn't follow the Jackson news, but I heard a sort of witness report that it was an anti climax held in the midst of empty streets, they even had to open the gates to pull people in to fill the empty spaces, that the ordinary apathetic citizen in LA was brought to paroxysms of anger when the police closed down freeways that morning, in anticipation of a huge influx of "mourners", that thousands of cops were on duty to police the non event, that the public purse is millions of dollars lighter.
Hardly a day that you'd say the music died.
well that was the LA police department that decided to close the freeways that morning, surely nothing to do with the Jacksons. or maybe they bought the police department? the same ones who tried to convict him of being a molester
Quote from: ONeill on July 08, 2009, 08:15:17 PM
Quote from: ziggysego on July 08, 2009, 04:44:19 PM
I have to agree with you stew, stomach wasn't good listening to all that.
As for Al Sharpton.... WTF? I was half expecting him to claim that Jackson ended slavery in the USA too!
Why on earth would you sit through it when you claim he was an evil man with evil ways and will meet his maker?
No one made you do it i'm sure. I can't think of one reason why I'd watch a memorial service for someone I disliked or abhorred.
Talk about going out of your way to be offended/disgusted.
The point of my thread wasn't about his alleged past. I'm not getting into that again. My views are known, so what's the point going on about it.
Rather it was about how Jackson is being protrayed now. The way Sharpton was going on was way over the top, even you must agree with that. Anyway, at that point I switched over.
Quote from: muppet on July 08, 2009, 06:08:02 PM
Quote from: SidelineKick on July 08, 2009, 04:47:39 PM
Quote from: stew on July 08, 2009, 04:19:04 PM
In life the man paid off two families who claimed Jackson had molested their sons. I for one wont be lamenting his loss.
The revered Al Sharpton, the mouthy preacher someone liked earlier is nothing but a hypocritical slabber, worse than Jesse Jackson, they both show up wherever the is a bit of publicity to be found.
Only in American can you be acquitted by buying off the families of the children who suffered at a paedo's hands. In this country it seems that if you have money you can buy your way out of anything. Shame.
I wonder if any of the Mods will have anything to say about this comment...
It is an idiotic comment.
I read recently where Slash was in studio working on a couple of Jackson's songs he asked about the ridiculous amount of equipment lying around. He was told that Jackson (or at least his producers) rented the most expensive of everything they could get their hands on even if there was no chance of ever using it. When Slash commented that it was a waste of money he was told that at that moment there were another ten studios all over the States booked up and kitted out similarly just in case Michael felt 'inspired' to record in another city.
When he asked about paying off the law suits he was told that Michael said to pay them, money was what they wanted and it was just easier than going to court.
There is nothing idiotic about it, he paid money to two different families to get them to back away from their claims, he slept with children not his own and he was said to have touched them inappropriately, what the fcuk kept him out of jail? MONEY is the answer, see OJ, Mark Chmura and every other herer out there who got away with light sentences or off altogether because of back stair dealing.
I wouldnt listen to his music for love nor money, he sickened me the second I heard he had paid families off.
Quote from: ziggysego on July 08, 2009, 08:42:58 PM
Quote from: ONeill on July 08, 2009, 08:15:17 PM
Quote from: ziggysego on July 08, 2009, 04:44:19 PM
I have to agree with you stew, stomach wasn't good listening to all that.
As for Al Sharpton.... WTF? I was half expecting him to claim that Jackson ended slavery in the USA too!
Why on earth would you sit through it when you claim he was an evil man with evil ways and will meet his maker?
No one made you do it i'm sure. I can't think of one reason why I'd watch a memorial service for someone I disliked or abhorred.
Talk about going out of your way to be offended/disgusted.
The point of my thread wasn't about his alleged past. I'm not getting into that again. My views are known, so what's the point going on about it.
Rather it was about how Jackson is being protrayed now. The way Sharpton was going on was way over the top, even you must agree with that. Anyway, at that point I switched over.
No one is asking about your views on his past. Why would you watch a memorial service for someone you disliked so vehemently, someone who sickened you so much?
but do you not think stew, that the families would have got justice and way more Compo had they went through with the trial?
plenty of rich guys out there put in jail every week, cant use money as a reason all the time, most people don't 'get away with murder'
you me and the rest will never know the truth. what would your views be if one of these kids came on and said nothing happened? 'my parents made me go to his house and they made me lie just so we could get money'
QuoteI wouldnt listen to his music for love nor money, he sickened me the second I heard he had paid families off.
Thank God the Birmingham 6 didn't ask you to fight their corner if you take everything at face value.
Always a sign of a desperate tactic, invoking the Birmingham 6 case.
The Birmingham 6 case is an example of why we (the public) do not have to accept Court judgements or legal procedural absolvements as gospel definitions of right and wrong, that we can appraise evidence and circumstance on their merits and come to another conclusion.
Quote from: Main Street on July 08, 2009, 09:23:35 PM
Always a sign of a desperate tactic, invoking the Birmingham 6 case.
The Birmingham 6 case is an example of why we (the public) do not have to accept Court judgements or legal procedural absolvements as gospel definitions of right and wrong, that we can appraise evidence and circumstance on their merits and come to another conclusion.
Always a sign of a desperate tactic saying 'always a sign of a desperate tactic'.
Quote from: Main Street on July 08, 2009, 09:23:35 PM
Always a sign of a desperate tactic, invoking the Birmingham 6 case.
The Birmingham 6 case is an example of why we (the public) do not have to accept Court judgements or legal procedural absolvements as gospel definitions of right and wrong, that we can appraise evidence and circumstance on their merits and come to another conclusion.
I think that's an example of using a lot of words to say absolutely nothing.
I used it to show how Stew's statement that the 'second I heard' isn't an ideal way to judge anything, especially when it comes to high profile protagonists.
Quote from: ONeill on July 08, 2009, 09:11:31 PM
QuoteI wouldnt listen to his music for love nor money, he sickened me the second I heard he had paid families off.
Thank God the Birmingham 6 didn't ask you to fight their corner if you take everything at face value.
Shane, he admitted to sleeping with children, that is a fact, he paid of two families and that is also a fact. An innocent man in his situation would have fought that charge tooth and nail, he chose to pay off those families and this helped get him acquited, that too is a fact.
Quote from: ONeill on July 08, 2009, 09:47:30 PM
I think that's an example of using a lot of words to say absolutely nothing.
I used it to show how Stew's statement that the 'second I heard' isn't an ideal way to judge anything, especially when it comes to high profile protagonists.
Read Stews explanation and don't be play acting the gobshite (which you do very well), in a case as serious as this.
Stew is entitled to his viewpoint according to his appraisal of all the facts, not just one fact
According to Stew, the paying off was the last straw.
Meaning he had left some room for doubt, an open mind until he heard that news.
Quote from: stew on July 08, 2009, 09:54:40 PM
Quote from: ONeill on July 08, 2009, 09:11:31 PM
QuoteI wouldnt listen to his music for love nor money, he sickened me the second I heard he had paid families off.
Thank God the Birmingham 6 didn't ask you to fight their corner if you take everything at face value.
Shane, he admitted to sleeping with children, that is a fact, he paid of two families and that is also a fact. An innocent man in his situation would have fought that charge tooth and nail, he chose to pay off those families and this helped get him acquited, that too is a fact.
It is difficult to commit crimes while asleep, that is a fact. He spent a fortune on nonsense, that is a fact. Your post and opinion is entirely circumstantial, that too is a fact.
QuoteAccording to Stew, the paying off was the last straw.
Meaning he had left some room for doubt, an open mind until he heard that news.
Tremendous mind-reading capabilities from across the Atlantic. I've argued with Stew long enough to understand he's a man of great impulse!
Quote from: ONeill on July 08, 2009, 10:05:25 PM
QuoteAccording to Stew, the paying off was the last straw.
Meaning he had left some room for doubt, an open mind until he heard that news.
Tremendous mind-reading capabilities from across the Atlantic. I've argued with Stew long enough to understand he's a man of great impulse!
Ballix Shane.
I did not want Jackson to be guilty of what he was accused of, I was hoping the charges were false, his lawyers denied everything right up to the point were they bought off two families, the lawyers were interviewed and admitted that yes they had reached a settlement with said families for undisclosed amounts of money.
I hoped he was innocent but looking at it logically Shane, the man admitted to sleeping with children, was accused of child abuse and subsequently bought off two families. To me that proved he was guilty regardless of wether or not he was found guilty in a court of law.
My initial reaction when the accusations came out was simply that the guy is a nut job and that he probably slept with the kids because he saw himself as a kid, a peter pan type of figure. I did not know if I believed he did it or not and thought that if he stuck to his guns, denied all charges and got acquited that would be good enough for me, when the news of the settlement came out I lost all faith in Jacksons denials, no man that was innocent with his means would pay off false accusers, he obviously was guilty of something repugnant at that juncture and from that perspective I no longer believed what came out of his or his representatives mouth.
I think he will be remembered as a musical genius but also there will always be the shadow of the inappropriate conduct with children, as for me, I will remember him as a very sick human being, one who had fame thrust upon him from no age and one who decided to act on learned behaviours that harmed some of the children in the way he was harmed. His family have a lot to answer for.
Quote from: ONeill on July 08, 2009, 09:11:31 PM
QuoteI wouldnt listen to his music for love nor money, he sickened me the second I heard he had paid families off.
Thank God the Birmingham 6 didn't ask you to fight their corner if you take everything at face value.
Shane, did Jackson pay off the families or not? if so he is guilty, if not he is innocent. Put yourself in that position, if you were falsely accused of say having child pornography and had the means to fight the charges tooth and nail, would you settle to avoid going to jail or would you fight the charges with everything you had. My guess is you would fight until you dropped, so would I, Jacksons lawyers bought his freedom, end of.
Quote from: milltown row on July 08, 2009, 09:03:09 PM
but do you not think stew, that the families would have got justice and way more Compo had they went through with the trial?
plenty of rich guys out there put in jail every week, cant use money as a reason all the time, most people don't 'get away with murder'
you me and the rest will never know the truth. what would your views be if one of these kids came on and said nothing happened? 'my parents made me go to his house and they made me lie just so we could get money'
It is not just that, he admitted to sleeping with children many times, it is more than one or two isolated incidents.
Oj got away with murder did he not? he lost a civil suit that cost him plenty is now resides in a maximum security prison after screwing up yet again. ;D
At some point the country has got to hold these icons as accountable as the rest of the citizenry. Just this last month an NFL player bought off a family after he drove drunk and killed a poor guy crossing the road, he got an unbelievably light sentence.
Why would any family want their child to go into court and have the worlds media bear down on them as they get ready to accuse one of the most famous men on the planet of child molestation? that is incentive enough to take the money and run I suppose, doesnt make it right.
Quote from: stew on July 08, 2009, 10:58:42 PM
My initial reaction when the accusations came out was simply that the guy is a nut job and that he probably slept with the kids because he saw himself as a kid, a peter pan type of figure. I did not know if I believed he did it or not and thought that if he stuck to his guns, denied all charges and got acquited that would be good enough for me, when the news of the settlement came out I lost all faith in Jacksons denials, no man that was innocent with his means would pay off false accusers, he obviously was guilty of something repugnant at that juncture and from that perspective I no longer believed what came out of his or his representatives mouth.
You've just said you changed your view as soon as you heard he had paid families.
Quote from: muppet on July 08, 2009, 06:58:43 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on July 08, 2009, 06:33:46 PM
Quote from: SidelineKick on July 08, 2009, 04:47:39 PM
Quote from: stew on July 08, 2009, 04:19:04 PM
In life the man paid off two families who claimed Jackson had molested their sons. I for one wont be lamenting his loss.
The revered Al Sharpton, the mouthy preacher someone liked earlier is nothing but a hypocritical slabber, worse than Jesse Jackson, they both show up wherever the is a bit of publicity to be found.
Only in American can you be acquitted by buying off the families of the children who suffered at a paedo's hands. In this country it seems that if you have money you can buy your way out of anything. Shame.
I wonder if any of the Mods will have anything to say about this comment...
There seems to be an ignorance on board on what constitutes libel. Mod earlier warned of 'libelous' remarks about Jackson. DEAD MEN CANNOT SUE -ie: be libelled. While it might seem cowardly or distasteful (to some) it ain't libellous.
Check out remarks by Peter King from American press and websites...
"A New York congressman says Michael Jackson was a "pervert" and calls on society to stop "glorifying" the late entertainer in a YouTube video.
Rep. Peter King said Jackson -- whom he called a "low-life" -- is being glorified in the days after his death while society ignores the efforts, of teachers, police officers, firefighters and veterans. In the two-minute video, King claims the "day in and day out" coverage of Jackson's death is "too politically correct."
"Let's knock out the psychobabble," King said in the video taped outside an American Legion Hall on New York's Long Island. "He was a pervert, a child molester; he was a pedophile. And to be giving this much coverage to him, day in and day out, what does it say about us as a country? I just think we're too politically correct."
King, a Republican who is among the possible contenders for the seat held by Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, said Jackson "may have been a good singer" and "did some dancing," but blasted the singer as someone who could not be trusted around children.
"There's nothing good to say about this guy," King continued. "But the bottom line is, would you let your child or grandchild be in the same room as Michael Jackson?"
So if you posted the same about oh say St Patrick you reckon no one should have a problem because technically he died and can't sue?
No-is a matter of opinion if people think it is ok or not. What i'm saying it is not libellous as some here seem to think. Personally I see nothing wrong with remarks about Jackson -as for St Patrick (incredible example by the way!) ..was there not something about sheep? :o
When watching Michael Jackson's coffin being pushed away by the Jackson Brothers, was anybody else reminded of those two words...
Cool Runnings.
I think Jacko was seriously messed up psychologically and was socially uncomfortable in the real world; in no small part to Papa Dollar Sign Joe who will probably have the Jackson 3 (Michaels Kids) on stage within 3 months!!! I think it was wrong and totally unacceptable and inappropriate for him to share his bed with children who weren't his own. I do however have to wonder; if anything untoward was happening at neverland other than messed up grown man trying to rekindle a childhood he never had; why (a) would Jackson give an exclusive interview and openly admit to sharing his bed with children and (b) it sounds, and this in itself sounds totally wrong, but it sounds like he shared his bed with a lot a lot of kids yet only two familes (that we are aware of) brought charges / were paid off. As I say to me the whole thing is wrong and has a total air of sleeze about, it I just don't get why he would admit to something that was going to totally indict himself with!
Quote from: jimbo on July 09, 2009, 07:35:19 AM
I think Jacko was seriously messed up psychologically and was socially uncomfortable in the real world; in no small part to Papa Dollar Sign Joe who will probably have the Jackson 3 (Michaels Kids) on stage within 3 months!!! I think it was wrong and totally unacceptable and inappropriate for him to share his bed with children who weren't his own. I do however have to wonder; if anything untoward was happening at neverland other than messed up grown man trying to rekindle a childhood he never had; why (a) would Jackson give an exclusive interview and openly admit to sharing his bed with children and (b) it sounds, and this in itself sounds totally wrong, but it sounds like he shared his bed with a lot a lot of kids yet only two familes (that we are aware of) brought charges / were paid off. As I say to me the whole thing is wrong and has a total air of sleeze about, it I just don't get why he would admit to something that was going to totally indict himself with!
The problem is there are at least three viewpoints on his sharing a bed with children:
1) There is Michael Jackson's view which to my mind seems to mean they all went to sleep and what is the big deal.
2) There is a constituency who seem to think that 'sleeping with' = having sexual relations with.
3) Then there is the view of a judge. We never got to hear what a judge would make of it so he is as legally innocent as the rest of us.
firstly RIP jacko..we really have lost one of the greatest entertainers that ever lived. regardless of his desperate personal problems.
secondly, i dont think it was right at all that he was allowed to sleep beside children and have watever "inappropriate" relationships he had..however, i dont entirely blame him. there were ALOT of people around him that should have known better than to allow this to happen including minders,family and ESPECIALLY the families of the children involved!! come on,if it was one of your own u simply wudnt let it happen so why the hell did they allow their kids to share a bed (innocently or otherwise) with a grown, unrelated man? ???
also, in the case of the young boy that came forward in the 2003 documentary, his parents were surely aware of the jordan chandler case so how they allowed this to begin with is beyond me..that is why i believe there was no intentional mallicious behaviour on jacksons part..he paid the money to save himself the catastrophic amount of press he new he would get. the families who accepted the money?gold digging scum..put it this way,if jacko really had done anythin and it was my child..no amount of money would stop me draggin him through the court to ensure he was punished.
Quote3) Then there is the view of a judge. We never got to hear what a judge would make of it so he is as legally innocent as the rest of us.
There's also the possibility that he was advised by his lawyers and PR folk that he could do significant damage to his commercial viability etc. by even taking the stand (whether he was guilty or not) and that the 'payoff' was the least risky option.
Quote from: Billys Boots on July 09, 2009, 01:34:12 PM
Quote3) Then there is the view of a judge. We never got to hear what a judge would make of it so he is as legally innocent as the rest of us.
There's also the possibility that he was advised by his lawyers and PR folk that he could do significant damage to his commercial viability etc. by even taking the stand (whether he was guilty or not) and that the 'payoff' was the least risky option.
Fair enough, but if my kid was abused the abuser wouldn't escape with a mere 'payoff'.
Quote from: muppet on July 09, 2009, 01:58:26 PM
Quote from: Billys Boots on July 09, 2009, 01:34:12 PM
Quote3) Then there is the view of a judge. We never got to hear what a judge would make of it so he is as legally innocent as the rest of us.
There's also the possibility that he was advised by his lawyers and PR folk that he could do significant damage to his commercial viability etc. by even taking the stand (whether he was guilty or not) and that the 'payoff' was the least risky option.
Fair enough, but if my kid was abused the abuser wouldn't escape with a mere 'payoff'.
$40 million and the American mindset? Also would have been aware and probably advised how difficult it would be to get conviction against such a rich and powerful person... ala OJ
Quote from: longrunsthefox on July 09, 2009, 02:42:48 PM
Quote from: muppet on July 09, 2009, 01:58:26 PM
Quote from: Billys Boots on July 09, 2009, 01:34:12 PM
Quote3) Then there is the view of a judge. We never got to hear what a judge would make of it so he is as legally innocent as the rest of us.
There's also the possibility that he was advised by his lawyers and PR folk that he could do significant damage to his commercial viability etc. by even taking the stand (whether he was guilty or not) and that the 'payoff' was the least risky option.
Fair enough, but if my kid was abused the abuser wouldn't escape with a mere 'payoff'.
$40 million and the American mindset? Also would have been aware and probably advised how difficult it would be to get conviction against such a rich and powerful person... ala OJ
One conspiracy at a time please.
Quote from: muppet on July 09, 2009, 05:28:30 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on July 09, 2009, 02:42:48 PM
Quote from: muppet on July 09, 2009, 01:58:26 PM
Quote from: Billys Boots on July 09, 2009, 01:34:12 PM
Quote3) Then there is the view of a judge. We never got to hear what a judge would make of it so he is as legally innocent as the rest of us.
There's also the possibility that he was advised by his lawyers and PR folk that he could do significant damage to his commercial viability etc. by even taking the stand (whether he was guilty or not) and that the 'payoff' was the least risky option.
Fair enough, but if my kid was abused the abuser wouldn't escape with a mere 'payoff'.
$40 million and the American mindset? Also would have been aware and probably advised how difficult it would be to get conviction against such a rich and powerful person... ala OJ
One conspiracy at a time please.
Oh! OJ was innocent... nice one Muppet :D
Quote from: ONeill on July 08, 2009, 11:16:16 PM
Quote from: stew on July 08, 2009, 10:58:42 PM
My initial reaction when the accusations came out was simply that the guy is a nut job and that he probably slept with the kids because he saw himself as a kid, a peter pan type of figure. I did not know if I believed he did it or not and thought that if he stuck to his guns, denied all charges and got acquited that would be good enough for me, when the news of the settlement came out I lost all faith in Jacksons denials, no man that was innocent with his means would pay off false accusers, he obviously was guilty of something repugnant at that juncture and from that perspective I no longer believed what came out of his or his representatives mouth.
You've just said you changed your view as soon as you heard he had paid families.
Not exactly, my view has always been that if you say you are innocent yet pay some people off you are guilty, Jackson denied everything and I wanted to believe him right up to the point where it was confirmed that he did in fact pay two families off, even you must find it hard to believe that this guy paid them off knowing it would forever tarnish his legacy AND give credence to the paedophillia stigma. he slept in the same bed as children, allegations were made, he paid families off, what the fcuk more do some of you people need?
Quote from: stew on July 09, 2009, 08:20:15 PM
if you say you are innocent yet pay some people off you are guilty
really- on what basis?
Stevie Wonder has just released a statement about Jackos death.
....... .. .. ..
.. . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . ..
.... ... .. ... ... ... ... .... ...... ... ... ... .... ..... .. .
.. . . .. . . . ..
... . .... ... .... .... ...
...... .... .... ..... ..... ..... ..... .. . . .... ....
. .. .
. . .. . .. . ...
........ ... ... ... .. ... ....... ... .. .... ... ... .... ....
. .. .. .
.. ....
.. . . . . . .. .. ..
.. .... .. ... ... ........ ...... .....
.. .. ..
.. . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . ..
.... ... .. ... ... ... ... .... ...... ... ... ... .... ..... .. .
.. . . .. . . . ..
... . .... ... .... .... ...
...... .... .... ..... ..... ..... ..... .. . . .... ....
. .. .
. . .. . .. . ...
........ ... ... ... .. ... ....... ... .. .... ... ... .... ....
. .. .. .
.. ....
.. . . . . . .. .. ..
.. .... .. ... ... ........ ...... .....
Quote from: Trevor Hill on July 10, 2009, 11:10:15 PM
Stevie Wonder has just released a statement about Jackos death.
....... .. .. ..
.. . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . ..
.... ... .. ... ... ... ... .... ...... ... ... ... .... ..... .. .
.. . . .. . . . ..
... . .... ... .... .... ...
...... .... .... ..... ..... ..... ..... .. . . .... ....
. .. .
. . .. . .. . ...
........ ... ... ... .. ... ....... ... .. .... ... ... .... ....
. .. .. .
.. ....
.. . . . . . .. .. ..
.. .... .. ... ... ........ ...... .....
.. .. ..
.. . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . ..
.... ... .. ... ... ... ... .... ...... ... ... ... .... ..... .. .
.. . . .. . . . ..
... . .... ... .... .... ...
...... .... .... ..... ..... ..... ..... .. . . .... ....
. .. .
. . .. . .. . ...
........ ... ... ... .. ... ....... ... .. .... ... ... .... ....
. .. .. .
.. ....
.. . . . . . .. .. ..
.. .... .. ... ... ........ ...... .....
Wow fair play to Stevie, pulling no punches there, he knows Jackson was at it!
Adolf isn't happy. Didn't take him for a fan of Jacko.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELyTBXzfQJ8
Here we go !!!!!!!!!!!
Jackson 'murdered' for money claims sister
Michael Jackson's sister La Toya believes the King of Pop was effectively 'murdered' for his money by a manipulative entourage, it was revealed today.
In interviews with Sunday newspapers, La Toya gave details about the 50-year-old singer's sudden death, drugs found in his body and a stash of cash and jewels that she claims have gone missing.
She told the News of the World: 'We don't think just one person was involved in the murder. It was a conspiracy to get Michael's money.'
AdvertisementLa Toya accused a 'shadowy' group of hangers-on of cutting him off from his family and friends and forcing him to sign up for 50 concerts at London's O2 arena.
They also fed him drugs and saw him as a 'cash cow', she claimed.
'Michael was worth more than a billion dollars. When anyone is worth that much money, there are always greedy people around them.'
'I believe Michael was murdered, I felt that from the start,' she added.
Jackson was the 'loneliest man in the world' with no real friends and isolated from his family at the time of his death - less than 12 hours after completing a rehearsal for his tour, she said.
La Toya claimed her brother had only wanted to do 10 shows in London but that the people around him did not care about him and were only interested in his money, and forced him to agree to do 50 shows.
She pledged the family would file a civil lawsuit against anyone they believed responsible and push for police to bring criminal charges
atleast thats it all sorted
Jackson 'had lethal drug levels'
Michael Jackson was being treated for insomnia, court documents show
Pop star Michael Jackson had lethal levels of the powerful anaesthetic propofol in his body when he died, coroner's office documents show.
The findings were contained in a previously sealed search warrant which has been made public in Texas.
The singer died in June from a cardiac arrest at his home in Los Angeles. Police have interviewed his doctor, but he has not been named as a suspect.
There are reports that the coroner has concluded Jackson's death was homicide.
The reports, carried by the Associated Press news agency quoting unnamed police sources, have not been confirmed.
But the BBC's Rajesh Mirchandani in Los Angeles says homicide includes manslaughter, and investigators have been trying to establish if there is a case for that charge.
PROPOFOL
A powerful anaesthetic usually used before and during surgery
Can also be used in small doses to reduce stress or anxiety
Produced as a white, opaque fluid and administered intravenously
Marketed under the trade name Diprivan
Jackson's doctor, Conrad Murray, has denied any wrongdoing.
Details of the Los Angeles County coroners' findings were revealed when a search warrant affidavit was made public in Houston, Texas, where Dr Murray has offices.
Dr Murray's offices were raided last month as part of the police investigation into the singer's death.
The coroner's office has not published its findings regarding the singer's death.
Addiction fears
According to the affidavit, the LA chief coroner "had reviewed the preliminary toxicology results and his preliminary assessment of Jackson's cause of death was due to lethal levels of propofol".
The documents go on to say that Dr Murray told police he had been giving Jackson propofol as part of his treatment for insomnia.
But, he said he had been concerned Jackson was becoming addicted to the drug and had been trying to wean him off, using alternative drugs.
But, on the morning of the singer's death, Dr Murray is reported to have relented and given Jackson a lower dosage of propofol after a number of other drugs had not worked.
He left the star alone to make some telephone calls and when he returned Jackson was not breathing, the LA Times reports.
Dr Murray is known to have performed CPR on his patient while the paramedics were called, but Jackson was declared dead when he arrived at hospital.
Dr Conrad Murray was Michael Jackson's personal physician
Bottles of propofol found in Jackson's house show it had been prescribed by several doctors, not just Conrad Murray, but he remains at the centre of the inquiry, our correspondent adds.
Earlier this month, Dr Murray - who was employed as Michael Jackson's personal physician for a series of concerts in London scheduled for July - posted a video message of YouTube to thank his supporters.
"I told the truth and I have faith the truth will prevail," he said in the short one-minute clip.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8219362.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8219362.stm)
That's Bad
If it is proven to be homicide
How can you have a autopsy on someone who's not even dead...
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9b8_1251194026
:D
Quote from: The Watcher Pat on August 27, 2009, 06:59:56 PM
How can you have a autopsy on someone who's not even dead...
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9b8_1251194026
:D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iku_T93OEsg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iku_T93OEsg)
Coroner says it was homicide - acute intoxication by anaesthetic.
Wacko Jacko Whacked
Conrad Murray found guilty of involuntary manslaughter.
Clearly the jury just didn't blame it on the boogie
Smooth criminal.
When I first heard of this charge against Murray I thought he would BEAT IT
Quote from: Minder on November 07, 2011, 10:08:23 PM
When I first heard of this charge against Murray I thought he would BEAT IT
you are not alone there mate
Seems like it was a bit of a thriller all right. Poor fella probably just thinking leave me alone, but that propofol is dangerous, doesnt matter if you are black or white.
Bad puns aside, mine excepted, did anyone see the requisite freak show outside the courthouse, saw a middle aged fat honky with the white glove and hat and a black woman holding up a really old paper with OJ Simpson on the front and a "Not guilty" headline.
didnt follow it, still trying to figure out the difference between involuntary manslaughter and manslaughter, ???
Quote from: eddie d on November 07, 2011, 10:20:39 PM
didnt follow it, still trying to figure out the difference between involuntary manslaughter and manslaughter, ???
Murder is when you mean it.
Manslaughter is when you didn't mean it.
Involuntary manslaughter is when you didn't mean not to mean it.
I thought some of the coverage was off the wall
Being famous in the US is such a freak show. Look at poor Marilyn Monroe and Judy Garland and Elvis and Michael Jackson.
At least the Irish megastars like Westlife and Twink have their feet firmly on the ground, hah?
fair play to westlife, the highest paid tribute act in ireland :D
No winners here - Jackson really was a very, very troubled soul !!
Dont blame it on the sunshine, Dont blame it on the moonlight, Dont blame it on the good times.
Blame it on the Doctor.
This verdict is to me, a t.ravesty, the f**king family sitting there should have been on trial for letting him go on tour completely out of his head on drugs, he was physically and mentally exhausted, they didn't care, it was all about the benjamins for them.
I thought this Doctor would be the scapegoat, they had to have someone to blame and he fit the bill, but to me the family were worse, they are a disgusting bunch of bastards if you ask me.
Doctor of the year he was not, this verdict will have Hollywood doctors shitting themselves
This was quick but I suppose it was made ages ago.
The Man Who Killed Michael Jackson.
10.00pm. Channel 4.
Just days after the trial of Dr Conrad Murray returned a guilty verdict for the involuntary manslaughter of Michael Jackson, this powerful and dramatic documentary explores the relationship between the King of Pop and his personal physician, with exclusive access to Dr Murray and his defence. The documentary, by multi-award-winning director Tom Roberts, has filmed with Murray and followed him throughout the trial itself, away from the glare of the public spotlight. The film explores Jackson's private world where the controversial use of powerful medication was a way of life, where a man adored by millions lived as a virtual recluse and where an unknown cardiologist from Las Vegas found himself the unexpected companion, confidante and intimate to one of the most famous men in the world. When Michael Jackson died on 25 June 2009 only two people were in the room: Jackson and Dr Conrad Murray. This observational and independent documentary uncovers the fatal friendship behind the headlines and reveals the chain of events that led to one man dead and the other fighting a losing battle for his reputation and freedom